On Wed, 2015-08-19 at 12:15 +0100, Mike Scott wrote:
> Well, it looks like a 4.0 review to me. Firefox gives page info as
> published time: 2013-05-01T16:57:00+00:00
I get a LO 5.0 review... but it is OK, you aren't missing anything. It
is a pretty typical drive-by rubbish review which spends mos
Quick and dirty Basic routine to copy properties from obj1 to obj2:
> Sub cloneProperties(obj1, obj2)
> dim a, i, s, v
> a() = obj1.PropertySetInfo.getProperties()
> on error goto resumeNextErr
> for each i in a()
> s = i.Name
> v = obj1.getPropertyValue(s)
> obj2.setPropertyValu
On 08/20/2015 06:12 AM, Adam Tauno Williams wrote:
> I miss the depth of old BYTE! magazine reviews.
I have every print issue of Byte on my shelf, right from the first,
Sept. 1975. I bought my first subscription, at the Ottawa Hamfest in
1975, from the original publisher, Wayne Green.
--
To uns
steveedmonds wrote
> On 2015-08-19 12:55, James Knott wrote:
>> On 08/18/2015 07:23 PM, Steve Edmonds wrote:
>>> Hi. Is this a review for LO 4? When I click on the link I get a review
>>> for 4.0
>> It says 5.0, when I click on the link.
>>
>>
> Must be a redirect because that link takes me to
> h
I managed to get the original article by using google translate, and
than choose to see the original language ;)
The lay-out is cluttered, but the article is readable.
https://translate.google.be/translate?hl=nl&sl=en&tl=nl&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.pcmag.com%2Farticle2%2F0%2C2817%2C2418419%2C00.asp&ann
On 20/08/15 12:20, Pedro wrote:
steveedmonds wrote
On 2015-08-19 12:55, James Knott wrote:
On 08/18/2015 07:23 PM, Steve Edmonds wrote:
Hi. Is this a review for LO 4? When I click on the link I get a review
for 4.0
It says 5.0, when I click on the link.
Must be a redirect because that link
The "fresh" branch introduces new features. The "still" branch is suggested
for "production" environments. I too would regard the fresh branch as "beta"
although Charles Schultz makes a distinction between fresh and beta: see the
section "Spring water" here:
http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php
Hello,
My little Java program uses Libreoffice's (Openoffice's) API named UNO to
talk to an installation of the new Libreoffice Version 5 (5.0.0.5).
Under Ubuntu Linux, the Java programs runs in a 64-Bit Java Virtual Machine
(JVM) and happily talks via UNO to Libreoffice 64-Bit to use some Li
Am 20.08.2015 um 19:09 schrieb chimak111:
> The "fresh" branch introduces new features. The "still" branch is suggested
> for "production" environments. I too would regard the fresh branch as "beta"
> although Charles Schultz makes a distinction between fresh and beta: see the
> section "Spring wat
Yay, that's actually cool :з So, I modified the code a bit to make it
Pythonish. It doesn't print all existing properties though, but I
modified it to print also at least every paragraph property. It is:
doc = desktop.loadComponentFromURL("file:///tmp/output.odt" ,"_blank", 0, ())
file = open('/tm
On 20/08/15 10:12, Adam Tauno Williams wrote:
> I should get a job writing these kinds of reviews
Why are you assuming that a human-being wrote the review?
It has most of the hallmarks of a bot-written review.
> EASY MONEY!
The days of the paid, professional reviewer are numbered.
>From one sid
On 2015-08-20 22:10, toki wrote:
On 20/08/15 10:12, Adam Tauno Williams wrote:
I should get a job writing these kinds of reviews
Why are you assuming that a human-being wrote the review?
It has most of the hallmarks of a bot-written review.
EASY MONEY!
The days of the paid, professional r
WTF are you trying to do? What is the purpose of comma separated machine
data in a word processor document? Why don't you save the shit in plain text
and then do whatever you want with it without struggling this horrible API?
--
View this message in context:
http://nabble.documentfoundation.or
>What is the purpose of comma separated machine data in a word processor
>document?
That is to save in file. The more newlines, the easier differ the text
with vimdiff. Because if'd left these thousands symbols lines as is,
it would be really hard to see what just changed.
>Why don't you save th
First: Attachments are not allowed on this list;
you'll need to upload it to some on-line site, then send the
URL; for us to have access to it.
Second: any PP made with MsFt programs, can be opened using LO's
Impress program; if you click on the PP & then choose 'Open', yo
in agreement, seemed like an ad. for MSFT ;-)
From: Gabriele Ponzo
Date: Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 6:46 PM
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] LibreOffice 5.0 Review & Rating | PCMag.com
To: Steve Edmonds
Cc: users@global.libreoffice.org
I've always believed that PC Mag is in M$'s payroll a
16 matches
Mail list logo